“Invisible Americans”

Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib (D, MI) thinks she has the support of “invisible” Americans, her constituents. It’s…unfortunate…that she does, but it’s especially saddening given what she thinks her constituents believe, which they seem to demonstrate by repeatedly electing her. Her antisemitic bigotry is blatant.

Here’s her claim regarding her openly supported slogan From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free. It’s

an aspirational call for freedom, human rights, and peaceful coexistence, not death, destruction, or hate.

This is a lie. The region encompassed by the slogan she so enthusiastically supports includes the region in which is situated the nation of Israel. Even were Tlaib’s associated claim that her one-nation solution wherein Jews and Arabs live “side-by-side” with “equal rights” were true, it would only be a supposedly peaceful driving out of Jews from their homeland since they would be dramatically outnumbered in population and in voting. Her own interpretation calls for the removal of Jews from the Middle East.

The more accurate interpretation of her slogan is the one that’s been the case since the First Intifada, a four-year period of overt terrorism against Israel perpetrated by Hamas. It’s a slogan of hatred of Jews and a call for their extermination, as noted by Congressman Max Miller (R, OH) on the House floor during the debate regarding House censure of Tlaib:

To be clear, “from the river to the sea,” as someone who’s Jewish, means to exterminate my people. I understand she thinks it’s some kind of aspirational message. I do think it’s aspirational—an aspiration to the genocide of Jews.

In response to the censure debate, Tlaib was careful to carry through her antisemitic bigotry: when she spoke during her part of the debate, she wore a Hamas keffiyeh over her blazer.

Here are the Jobs to Cut

A bunch of Washington Post journalists and staffers struck the print news outlet Thursday, upset over planned buyouts of 240 job holders, and layoffs if 240 don’t agree to buyouts.

WaPo reporter Marissa Lang:

We did not come to this decision to do this walkout lightly….

No, of course not….

The union, represented by the NewsGuild, said in an unsigned statement posted on X by New York Times(!) media reporter Ben Mullin,

Despite a year and a half of efforts, Post management has refused to bargain in good faith for a fair contract that keeps up with inflation and our competition[.]

The strike announcement subheadline reads, in part,

Unfair labor practice strike protests the Post’s disregard of the law in bargaining….

Because, of course it’s always management’s fault, the union always is lily-pure. Of course…. Unsubstantiated, smear claims like this are part of what gives unions a bad name.

No, it seems to me that “the union,” with its strike, has self-identified those 240 jobs and quite a few more that can, and should, be cut.